How to know that God exists.

Whatsisface said:
Why was it absurd?
Click to expand...
You said "There was never a time that the universe did not exist." Likewise there never was a universe in which time did not exist.

The universe is embedded in time. Time is embedded in the universe. The universe is embedded in space. Space is embedded in the universe. There is no space in which the universe does not exist. There is no universe in which space does not exist.

Both are true, but to STATE such tautologies is absurd and adds nothing to any conversation. It's as absurd as stating, "There is no property that I own that is not mine." Or "There are no numbers that are not numerical." Or "There are no visible objects that cannot be seen."
 
5wize said:
Good so far.....

Oh no! How disappointing. You were doing so well. That super-nature is definitely not the God you define.

How is it that you say in one sentence fragment that man cannot measure super-nature and then you go on to describe it anyway in the next sentence fragment? You are really not too aware of your own contradiction. Read it again and try to understand its folly for your own sake.

It's also beyond your capacity to define, but you try it anyway. Why?

Not so wise. The wise man says "The language and nature of God is found in silence, the rest is bad interpretation."

The less you say the better you display what you actually know about the supernatural.
Click to expand...


Read my exposition again:

5wize said:
. . . . . .


I for one don't disallow for the supernatural. That simply means it is above the nature we can currently measure and define. . . . . . .
Click to expand...


Hi 5wize, you are an advocate of nature, which man can measure and define.

But you don't deny the existence of supernature, which man cannot measure and cannot define.

So, it seems certain from your exposition that you admit nature which man can measure and defined: is contained in supernature which man cannot measure and define.

That supernature that man cannot measure and define, it is God.

Now you ask me, why should nature be contained inside supernature?

Simple: because nature is limited, man can measure and define it - but God/Supernature is unlimited.

Wherefore, an ancient wise man says: "In God/Supernature we live and move and have our being."
 
stiggy wiggy said:
You said "There was never a time that the universe did not exist." Likewise there never was a universe in which time did not exist.

The universe is embedded in time. Time is embedded in the universe. The universe is embedded in space. Space is embedded in the universe. There is no space in which the universe does not exist. There is no universe in which space does not exist.

Both are true, but to STATE such tautologies is absurd and adds nothing to any conversation. It's as absurd as stating, "There is no property that I own that is not mine." Or "There are no numbers that are not numerical." Or "There are no visible objects that cannot be seen."
Click to expand...
I think you miss the point, being, If there was never a time when the universe didn't exist, it didn't come from anything.
 
yrger said:
Read my exposition again:




Hi 5wize, you are an advocate of nature, which man can measure and define.
Click to expand...
Some of it.
yrger said:
But you don't deny the existence of supernature, which man cannot measure and cannot define.
Click to expand...
Correct... so why do you try to tell us what its measure and definition is and then put your inane mundane label on it called god?
yrger said:
So, it seems certain from your exposition that you admit nature which man can measure and defined: is contained in supernature which man cannot measure and define.
Click to expand...
We make strides into super-nature constantly, then that portion we discover becomes nature. What we don't do is take the portion still out of our reach that remains super-nature and try to stick some mundane flag of certain knowledge into it and declare it measured and defined like you do.
yrger said:
That supernature that man cannot measure and define, it is God.
Click to expand...
There you go again. You say you can't measure and define it - and then you do anyway. You are like a kid that can't keep his hands out of his own pants.
yrger said:
Now you ask me, why should nature be contained inside supernature?

Simple: because nature is limited, man can measure and define it - but God/Supernature is unlimited.
Click to expand...
How can you define it as God if it is not measurable and definable? You are a mess.
yrger said:
Wherefore, an ancient wise man says: "In God/Supernature we live and move and have our being."
Click to expand...
Not so wise. The wise man says "The language and nature of God is found in silence, the rest is bad interpretation."

The less you say the better you display what you actually know about the supernatural.
 
Last edited:
CrowCross said:
Then how did it get here?
Click to expand...
I don't know. Thing is though, the problem with your question is that it assumes it got here when a possibility is it exists necessarily. This would mean it didn't get here but rather could not fail to be. Your thinking on this is too simplistic.
 
The universe we live in has its beginning of existence at the Big Bang, this means that anterior to the Big Bang there is already an existence that is permanent and self-existent.

This permanent and self-existent entity is the creator source and operator of man and the universe and everything transient.

We call this entity God.

Doesn't this God come from another God like unto Himself, namely:
"permanent and self-existent entity the creator source and operator of man and the universe and everything transient"?

No need because entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate. -Occam's razor
 
yrger said:
The universe we live in has its beginning of existence at the Big Bang, this means that anterior to the Big Bang there is already an existence that is permanent and self-existent.
Click to expand...
Yes.
yrger said:
This permanent and self-existent entity is the creator source and operator of man and the universe and everything transient.
Click to expand...
No. Creator implies intent. You cannot prove the post big bang universe is a product of some pre big bang entity's intent.
yrger said:
We call this entity God.
Click to expand...
You don't know what it is.
yrger said:
Doesn't this God come from another God like unto Himself, namely:
"permanent and self-existent entity the creator source and operator of man and the universe and everything transient"?
Click to expand...
"Entity" is a post big bang concept. Therefor you cannot extend the term "entity", a term that only has meaning on this side of the big-bang, to anything prior to the big bang. So try again and don't use guesswork and unsupported assertions.
 
Last edited:
stiggy wiggy said:
So it suddenly appeared on the scene 13.8 billion years ago, coming from nothing? Sounds like an atheistic fairy tale.
Click to expand...
You've missed the point again. It didn't come from nothing or anything, it always was as there was no time it didn't exist. That atheists think it must come from nothing is a theistic fairy tale.
 
CrowCross said:
Then what was there prior to the so-called BB?

Can something create itself from nothing?

Many ways....that's another discussion.
Click to expand...
Who knows. Maybe another instance of the universe.
We don't know that anything has created itself from nothing.
We don't know if there ever was nothing. Or a lack of something.
 
CrowCross said:
There always has been something....God the creator. A God that has always existed. There is the requirement for somwthing to have always existed if there is anything existing today....or will you be able to argue that from nothing something can self create...be and not be at the same time.
Click to expand...
Is God "something"? Where did God exist? What does it even mean, to exist?
 
yrger said:
There is nothing to show that 1,2 or 3 will get you to knowledge of the existence of God.
a. is self evident.
You provide nothing to support b and c.
Therefore d. does not follow.

---------------

And Tiburon, you from your part, you have nothing to deny b and c.

So, from my part d follows, "Therefore God exists."

And I have the explanation for the existence of man and the universe and everything transient, while you, Tiburon, you have no explanation, starting with your own existence.

In ultimate summation, you Tiburon, have no explanation why there are man and the universe and everything transient.

But why - and you should ask yourself, why you are telling people that there is no explanation for your existence - and in ultimate summation, and that of your parents and everything: man the universe and everything transient.

Why, Tiburon, why - tell me.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you have an explanation. I hope you find it comforting. It may possibly even be true.
But apart from a. you have presented nothing to support the other premises of your argument. You have simply declared them.
 
5wize said:
Yes.

No. Creator implies intent. You cannot prove the post big bang universe is a product of some pre big bang entity's intent.

You don't know what it is.

"Entity" is a post big bang concept. Therefor you cannot extend the term "entity", a term that only has meaning on this side of the big-bang, to anything prior to the big bang. So try again and don't use guesswork and unsupported assertions.
Click to expand...

Hi 5wize, please, pick out one of your points the most important that you want me to answer to, because it is most inconvenient for me to re-act to several points from you.

Suppose you tell me what are the components of nature, for that is your in a way deity, okay?!

Oh no, please no, don't now go into what is a deity and what is supernature as opposed to nature etc etc etc . . .

Okay, tell me what are the components of nature, that's should be quick and easy for you to enumerate.

Best regards.
 
Tiburon said:
I'm glad you have an explanation. I hope you find it comforting. It may possibly even be true.
But apart from a. you have presented nothing to support the other premises of your argument. You have simply declared them.
Click to expand...


Hi Tiburon: first, thanks for your contributions to the thread.

I am expounding on the existence of God, I seem to notice that you are into a kind of advocay on no god exists.

If I may, what about you expound on how you come to the finding that no God exists, is that all right with you?
 
Whatsisface said:
It didn't come from nothing or anything, it always was as there was no time it didn't exist.
Click to expand...

Is the universe about 13.8 billion years old? Yes or no. If yes, that means it had a beginning 13.8 billion years ago. If so, what BEGAN it? And whatever began it, what materials did it have to work with? And whatever those materials were, where did they come from? And wherever they came from, how do you figure they were not part of an already existing universe?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top